Featured Image
UK Health Minister Matt HancockSteve Parsons - WPA Pool / Getty Images

(LifeSiteNews) — The U.K. Health Minister is once again in the news – this time over a so-called joke about the influence of Bill Gates on global health agendas.


Image via Twitter

This is both news – and not news. It is news because it proves what we already knew. To the people like Matt Hancock who ruined your life for no good reason – but for a good many wicked ones – your concerns about the nightmare reality they and their rich friends are happily engineering are a joke. They ruin your life and call you a lunatic for noticing. Then they laugh at you.

Managerial class is filled with contempt for ordinary people

Much of the news itself is written by people funded by Bill Gates and other helpful billionaires with no visible agenda. What we take for facts are labeled as such by organizations funded by these rich men with no agenda beyond their selfless generosity.

This is the reason these revelations matter: they are a candid if incomplete demonstration of how we are seen by the management. This message reveals the contempt for the ordinary person which is so widespread in our managerial class that it appears to be a qualification for high office.

The Daily Telegraph, which has published all these revelations, has a “Global Health Security Team.” This stalwart of journalistic integrity was the source of most of the Daily Telegraph’s reporting on COVID, on lockdowns, and yes – on those injections.

In case you were wondering, the Global Health Security Team is funded by Bill Gates. But don’t worry –

This support comes without strings and The Telegraph retains full editorial control over all the content published.

So that’s all right then. That $2,434,447 has no effect whatsoever on editorial decision making, which remains a safe and effective guarantee of journalistic integrity.

The paper publishing the scoop took this money, and the story here is that the “joke” is still on you.

Naturally, Bill Gates’ money has absolutely no influence over the many worldwide media outlets to which it has donated a quarter of a billion dollars.

This report examines one year of donations from the Gates Foundation to news outlets and related bodies over the period 2020-2021. Written by the unfortunately named Tim Schwab, it was featured in a Bolshevist journal called Jacobin.

The Jacobins, of course, were the revolutionary heroes of France who built special boats in which to drown thousands of peasants, when not busy murdering priests. 

The Drownings at Nantes – Joseph Aubert, 1882

Nobody questions the innocence of the name “Jacobin,” which like all revolutions of the religion of Man resulted in his mass extermination. This could be a coincidence, or it could be that the fact checkers and their patrons are sympathetic to this kind of politics.

We of the sanity-based community are used to be being called names for noticing things out loud. It is noteworthy to note that notable noticing is not always the sole property of “right wing conspiracy theorists.”

Tim Schwab, despite not being a “far right extremist,” says

I recently examined nearly twenty thousand charitable grants the Gates Foundation had made through the end of June and found more than $250 million going toward journalism. Recipients included news operations like the BBC, NBC, Al Jazeera, ProPublica, National Journal, The Guardian, Univision, Medium, the Financial Times, The Atlantic, the Texas Tribune, Gannett, Washington Monthly, Le Monde, and the Center for Investigative Reporting.

Presumably none of this has any influence over content or the manufacture of consent at all. Why then does Gates do this? He is not alone, as fellow philanthropist George Soros also spends his money for no reason at all on the machinery of influence.

A recent three part report by the U.S.-based Media Research Center showed that this philanthropy is a worldwide effort of selfless generosity:

At least 253 organizations across the world that focus on news and activist media were funded by Soros’ organizations.

Tim Schwab’s full report demonstrates the modesty of the Gates Foundation, which is hesitant to discuss its wholly charitable activities:

The Gates Foundation declined multiple interview requests for this story and would not provide its own accounting of how much money it has put toward journalism.

This philanthropy extends to providing work for anonymous commissars to debunk your basic observations about reality. Apparently, “Gates’s money was passed on to media fact-checking sites.”

Presumably, this has no effect at all on what is taken to be true in the media. With just one example taken at random, Tim Schwab showed how philanthropic funding magically coincides with a feedback loop of media production and management which results in the manufacture of “facts.” Writing in the Columbia Journalism Review, he said:

I found sixteen examples of Africa Check examining media claims related to Gates. This body of work overwhelmingly seems to support or defend Bill and Melinda Gates and their foundation, which has spent billions of dollars on development efforts in Africa.

Did Africa Check ever contradict the views of its benefactor?

The only example I found of Africa Check even remotely challenging its patron was when a foundation employee tweeted an incorrect statistic—that a child dies of malaria every 60 seconds, instead of every 108.

Take off the tinfoil hat, folks.

“Africa Check says it went on to receive an additional $1.5 million from Gates in 2017 and 2019. Our funders or supporters have no influence over the claims we fact-check… and the conclusions we reach in our reports,” said Noko Makgato, executive director of Africa Check, in a statement to CJR.

This should put those conspiracy minded thoughts to rest. The facts have been checked and they just happen to agree with everything our noble donors would like you to think. What are the odds?

We have followed all the science that money could buy, and it led us into serfdom

“Content moderation” is of course just another term for  ideological censorship. It is work which is important in the battle to replace reality with the obsessions of fringe lunatics.

Soros’ own operations are – by sheer chance – concerned with the promotion of a variety of “progressive” agendas which, without heavy propaganda, would otherwise remain outlandish or simply repulsive to normal people. The International Fact Checking Network run by his Poynter Institute works with 100 fact checking operations worldwide, restricting opinion on LGBT matters, as well as “abortion, transgender ideology in children, COVID and Marxist ideas.”

The Soros-backed Open Democracy operation “pushes extreme leftist content masquerading as journalism… [including] anti-Christian propaganda, calls for the abolition of the nuclear family, and climate radicalism.”

The philanthropic and motiveless donation of millions of dollars has no effect at all on the public perception of, say, vaccine safety. If you, like The Florida Standard, publish an article with evidence from Johns Hopkins and Harvard universities which disagree with the views of certain philanthropists, you may find your article deleted and replaced with a message from a company called Lead Stories:

Lead Stories is a member of the #CoronaVirusFactAlliance which in turn is run by the International Fact-Checking Network at the Poynter Institute, a St. Petersburg, Florida foundation which is supported by donations from radical activist oligarchs such as Bill Gates, Pierre Omidyar and George Soros.

This is fine, I suppose, since we are not the Florida Standard – oh wait:

The company has a contract where they provide censorship services to Big Tech companies, including Facebook and Google.

It appears that philanthropic intentions have no connection then to manufacturing and promoting novel injections, nor to influencing news outlets, and nor indeed to the censorship industry – sorry – “fact checkers.” Money given in vast amounts to these operations is done so for no reason, other than that giving money is a nice thing to do.

I fail to see what is so funny about Bill Gates’ intentions, as he and his fellow philanthropists have done a great deal to prevent you from thinking out loud about anything with which they disagree. This is no joke. It is deadly serious. We have followed all the science that money could buy, and it led us into serfdom.

The posthuman future imagined by philanthropists and politicians is one of a mass scale global management utopia. It is pleasant to them, though it will come at the expense of everything we value except online shopping. It remains a joke to the management that we may have some concerns over being gaslit into the twilight of humanity. These people spend a lot of money on shaping how we see them, their ideas, and the plans they have for us.

For once, we have seen exactly how they see us. Never forget what you mean to them.